Goonersworld

Well our system allows the people to choose their represents of the area too, you have two votes one for the direct voted dude of your local electoral district and a 2nd vote for a party nationwide.

"Die Linke" ("The Left") got four direct represents, the green one overall "Die Linke" ended up with 64 seats cause they got 8,6% (3.755.699/43.726.856) of the 2nd votes.

In MMP the parties in the German Bundestag needed between roughly 61,000 and 51,000 votes per seat that's a difference of around 10,000 per seat while in the UK voting system the difference in votes between an UKIP and SNP seat was around 3,850,000 votes ..

SchlandGooner wrote:Well our system allows the people to choose their represents of the area too, you have two votes one for the direct voted dude of your local electoral district and a 2nd vote for a party nationwide.

"Die Linke" ("The Left") got four direct represents, the green one overall "Die Linke" ended up with 64 seats cause they got 8,6% (3.755.699/43.726.856) of the 2nd votes.

In MMP the parties in the German Bundestag needed between roughly 61,000 and 51,000 votes per seat that's a difference of around 10,000 per seat while in the UK voting system the difference in votes between an UKIP and SNP seat was around 3,850,000 votes ..

Ideally, our system assumes the MP won't vote for his party, but for his area, going even against his party at times.

That also happens, and is one of the reasons the Syrian war never happened.

I think the direct and indirect system would be too complicated.

We lost the elections more then torys winning it...choosing Ed as leader of the party was a huge mistake.

The guy has no charisma,appeal...he sounds like he has a lisp....and him getting BULLIED by Cameron in the parliament sessions regularly was painful to watch.

Put '96 Blair in his position and we would have steamrollered to victory...hell,David Miliband would have done a better job.

John Ozil wrote:We lost the elections more then torys winning it...choosing Ed as leader of the party was a huge mistake.

The guy has no charisma,appeal...he sounds like he has a lisp....and him getting BULLIED by Cameron in the parliament sessions regularly was painful to watch.

Put '96 Blair in his position and we would have steamrollered to victory...hell,David Miliband would have done a better job.

Ed wasn't the problem, imo

It was the entire policy of not even taking on the Tory narrative.

Either you admit it was a mistake, or you outline completely why it wasn't. Labour did neither, and are you surprised the public didn't trust them on the economy if you neither defend your record, nor admit it was wrong?

bring back David Miliband!!!

GoonerAlexis wrote:

John Ozil wrote:We lost the elections more then torys winning it...choosing Ed as leader of the party was a huge mistake.

The guy has no charisma,appeal...he sounds like he has a lisp....and him getting BULLIED by Cameron in the parliament sessions regularly was painful to watch.

Put '96 Blair in his position and we would have steamrollered to victory...hell,David Miliband would have done a better job.

Ed wasn't the problem, imo

It was the entire policy of not even taking on the Tory narrative.

Either you admit it was a mistake, or you outline completely why it wasn't. Labour did neither, and are you surprised the public didn't trust them on the economy if you neither defend your record, nor admit it was wrong?

Ed was a major problem...even i didnt really want to vote for HIM.

The unions selected the "weak" brother so they could easily control him, instead of the stronger Dave Milliband. As a result there was little trust in the labour leaders Independence from meddling unions and the world leaders treated Ed as a weak sibling puppet never destined for the premier role. If Dave had been the head of the party,...Labour would have won.

as for the economy..Callum already said that the entire world economy suffered...we're fortunant we didnt do as bad as Spain or France

Next labour leader Ladbrokes

Chuka Umunna 5/2
Andy Burnham 5/2
Yvette Cooper 7/2
David Miliband 20/1

other then Dave and maybe Chuka...the rest are garbage

John Ozil wrote:Next labour leader Ladbrokes

Chuka Umunna 5/2
Andy Burnham 5/2
Yvette Cooper 7/2
David Miliband 20/1

other then Dave and maybe Chuka...the rest are garbage

It will be a woman 100%.

I'm putting £20 on any female candidate that runs for labour.

I had a bet on the labour leadership back in January 2013.

Andy Burnham to be next Labour leader

£6....... at 40/1

John Ozil wrote:

GoonerAlexis wrote:

John Ozil wrote:We lost the elections more then torys winning it...choosing Ed as leader of the party was a huge mistake.

The guy has no charisma,appeal...he sounds like he has a lisp....and him getting BULLIED by Cameron in the parliament sessions regularly was painful to watch.

Put '96 Blair in his position and we would have steamrollered to victory...hell,David Miliband would have done a better job.

Ed wasn't the problem, imo

It was the entire policy of not even taking on the Tory narrative.

Either you admit it was a mistake, or you outline completely why it wasn't. Labour did neither, and are you surprised the public didn't trust them on the economy if you neither defend your record, nor admit it was wrong?

Ed was a major problem...even i didnt really want to vote for HIM.

The unions selected the "weak" brother so they could easily control him, instead of the stronger Dave Milliband. As a result there was little trust in the labour leaders Independence from meddling unions and the world leaders treated Ed as a weak sibling puppet never destined for the premier role. If Dave had been the head of the party,...Labour would have won.

as for the economy..Callum already said that the entire world economy suffered...we're fortunant we didnt do as bad as Spain or France

Ed was a problem, but he was one of two major ones. The other one is the economy. No one cares what Callum says, even if he's right. They care what Labour says. Why should we listen to Labour supporters defending Labour when Labour itself never cared to? They came across as accepting they were to blame, but not admitting it or saying they'd correct the mistakes

The first real article from a Labour MP saying the economy was not their fault came out yesterday. They had 5 years to get that out, but never even tried. Which is why the public didn't trust them.

just checked,Chuka didnt attend Oxbridge...

so there go his chance for labour leadership

John Ozil wrote:Next labour leader Ladbrokes

Chuka Umunna 5/2
Andy Burnham 5/2
Yvette Cooper 7/2
David Miliband 20/1

other then Dave and maybe Chuka...the rest are garbage

Surprised Tristram Hunt isn't in the running. Tristam party leader, Chuka shadow chancellor.

Though my preference is still Miliband senior.

David Miliband now lives in New York. He's not an MP anymore.

John Ozil wrote:We lost the elections more then torys winning it...choosing Ed as leader of the party was a huge mistake.

The guy has no charisma,appeal...he sounds like he has a lisp....and him getting BULLIED by Cameron in the parliament sessions regularly was painful to watch.

Put '96 Blair in his position and we would have steamrollered to victory...hell,David Miliband would have done a better job.

Labour lost the election because they didn't have a clear message - they were too far aligned to the right for the north and for Scotland and too far to the left to appeal to the south of England. Ed always came across as a decent bloke and largely as a competent politician who suffered from a lack of identity and a horrific smear campaign from the right-wing media. Unfortunately the fact he once ate a bacon sandwich a bit funnily meant lots of people were put off by him - such is the nature of modern day politics in the UK.

Yorkyblue wrote:It is a bit of a joke when there is a party called 'Canabis is safer than alcohol' or whatever they call themselves. It's wasted votes and just pathetic.

And what about Al Murry? If he was doing this as part of a stand up routine then I could understand but he's got involved in a close vote where people have wasted votes and he could of caused it to go the other way.

Maybe it's time to be doing what Blatter does in the football? Prove you have support as a party or you're not involved

I completely disagree. Whilst there are always going to be joke candidates you can't let them stop legitimate parties having the opportunities to build from the ground up. They barely win any of the vote anyway, we're talking a tiny fraction of wasted votes.

UFGN wrote:David Miliband now lives in New York. He's not an MP anymore.

I know he's not an MP anymore and has moved to NY

He's still a signed up member of the Labour party, and only needs to contest a safe seat in a by-election when someone inevitably defects or kicks the bucket in the next year or 2.

Five years as opposition leader is a long time, so ideally he comes in as the saviour of the Labour party after a couple of years.

He's probably over the whole thing, but that's what people said about Hillary...